230 So. 3d 368
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- Orr, a part-time employee at The Buckle, used the store iPad on July 4, 2014; she took it to the storeroom to charge it (per her account) and later left the store carrying a large open purse.
- The iPad was later discovered missing; corporate review of security footage showed Orr was the last person seen using it. All employees had access to the single iPad and its charger was kept in the back room.
- Store manager Mallory Morgan reported the iPad missing to police and described Orr as the last person seen with it; manager Nason Stephens signed an affidavit at police request.
- Orr was arrested and charged with petit larceny but was later acquitted. She then sued The Buckle, Morgan, and Stephens alleging malicious prosecution and related torts.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants. On appeal, the court reversed in part, finding genuine factual disputes on probable cause and malice and remanding on malicious prosecution, false arrest, false imprisonment, and punitive damages; it affirmed dismissal of conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for prosecution | Orr: managers lacked reasonable grounds; their theory was conjecture based on her being last seen with iPad | Buckle: footage showed Orr last with the only iPad; investigation and elimination of others provided reasonable grounds | Reversed: genuine issue of material fact exists whether probable cause existed; summary judgment improper |
| Malice in instituting prosecution | Orr: defendants acted maliciously, knowingly provided false statements and pursued charges to harm her | Buckle: pursued report in good faith to recover property; no evidence of improper purpose | Reversed in part: malice is a jury question given circumstantial link to lack of probable cause |
| Civil conspiracy | Orr: defendants coordinated to provide false information and commit perjury | Buckle: acts were by agents of the corporation—corporation cannot conspire with itself | Affirmed: conspiracy claim fails as a matter of law (agents = corporation) |
| Intentional infliction of emotional distress | Orr: defendants’ conduct in pursuing charges was outrageous and caused severe distress | Buckle: conduct did not rise to the extreme "outrageous" standard | Affirmed: claim fails—record lacks conduct evoking outrage or revulsion |
Key Cases Cited
- Moon v. Condere Corp., 690 So.2d 1191 (Miss. 1997) (elements of malicious-prosecution tort)
- Hudson v. Palmer, 977 So.2d 369 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (probable cause is honest belief based on facts apparent when prosecution is initiated)
- Perkins v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 46 So.3d 839 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (unfounded suspicion/conjecture cannot support probable cause; malice focuses on defendant's objective)
- Benjamin v. Hooper Elec. Supply Co., 568 So.2d 1182 (Miss. 1990) (lack of adequate investigation vitiates probable cause)
- Junior Food Stores Inc. v. Rice, 671 So.2d 67 (Miss. 1996) (insufficient evidence and inadequate investigation can defeat probable cause)
- McClinton v. Delta Pride Catfish Inc., 792 So.2d 968 (Miss. 2001) (probable cause requires honest belief and reasonable grounds; burden at summary judgment)
- Royal Oil Co. Inc. v. Wells, 500 So.2d 439 (Miss. 1986) (absence of probable cause is circumstantial evidence of malice)